get_design_templates

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the annotation openWorldHint. It lacks details on whether the list is paginated, sorted, or requires authentication. The annotation covers result stability, but the description adds nothing extra.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no excess words. It is front-loaded with the action. However, it could be slightly more concise by removing 'which are used to create new proposals' if that is implied by context.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has no output schema, and the description does not explain the return format or contents. For a list tool, agents would benefit from knowing what fields are included. The annotation openWorldHint hints at variability but is not elaborated.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. With zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since there are none to describe.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists design templates for creating proposals. It uses a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('design templates'), and distinguishes from siblings like get_proposal_templates or get_email_templates.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage context (for creating proposals) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as get_proposal_templates. No exclusions or when-not-to-use information is given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.